On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 4:53 PM, Chris McDonough wrote:
> I'm not sure that any particular default root object is going to solve
> this problem, because they're just going to put a dictionary into one of
> its keys and hurt themselves that way. I think the idea of a warning
> when a record exceed
The file storage iterator was implemented before Python had iterators.
(Actually, Python previously had an iterator based on a corner
of the sequence protocol, which FileStorage used.)
There's a test for storage iterators that verifies that they raise
a special exception that extends StopIteration
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 1:57 PM, Tres Seaver wrote:
...
> Jim, would you please review and merge the 'tseaver-better_repozo_tests'
> branch to the ZODB trunk? The only non-test change is the one I'm
> replying to, which is intended purely to make stuff more unit testable.
Done
> Once this merge
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tres Seaver wrote:
> Log message for revision 112305:
> Hooks for testability:
>
> Raise an exception from 'do_full_backup' / 'do_incremental_backup' where
> we would have called sys.exit(2) to avoid overwriting files. Catch the
> excepti
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 4:33 PM, Tres Seaver wrote:
> I would be willing to make a stab at this, if we can hold off on a
> 3.10.0 beta until I've had a chance to try it.
Oh, awesome! Best possible outcome I could hope for - someone else
wants to do the work for me ;-)
Hanno
_
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 10:33 AM, Tres Seaver wrote:
...
> I would be willing to make a stab at this, if we can hold off on a
> 3.10.0 beta until I've had a chance to try it.
Sure. I'd like to make another release early next week, but that can
be another alpha.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton
_
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tres Seaver wrote:
> Hanno Schlichting wrote:
>> On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 10:24 AM, Christian Theune wrote:
>>> Hmm. If the full backup is just a regular FS file then you could start
>>> with the naive approach and just open/close it once after perform
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 10:24 AM, Christian Theune wrote:
>> Hmm. If the full backup is just a regular FS file then you could start
>> with the naive approach and just open/close it once after performing a
>> backup as that
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 10:24 AM, Christian Theune wrote:
> Hmm. If the full backup is just a regular FS file then you could start
> with the naive approach and just open/close it once after performing a
> backup as that would create the index file.
Sure. That would be an easy but also rather ine
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 4:27 AM, Christian Theune wrote:
> On 05/12/2010 01:11 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
>> It occurs to me that it would be useful, at the application level, to
>> have some measure of an object's record size. This would, for
>> example, be a better basis for OOBucket splits than ite
Thanks Christian.
With a little rooting around based on your advice I have got the independent
saving working.
Thanks for your help.
Matt
-Original Message-
From: zodb-dev-bounces+mnoble=xype@zope.org
[mailto:zodb-dev-bounces+mnoble=xype@zope.org] On Behalf Of Christian Theune
Se
On 05/14/2010 10:06 AM, Matthew Noble wrote:
> I have only just started to use ZODB and have been able to use it with
> ease so far.
>
> I want to be able to have access to multiple ZODB databases at the same
> time that are completely independent.
>
> What I cannot see how to do is to keep the cha
On 05/12/2010 01:11 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
> It occurs to me that it would be useful, at the application level, to
> have some measure of an object's record size. This would, for
> example, be a better basis for OOBucket splits than item count.
I thought we gained such an _p_ attribute as an indic
On 05/12/2010 11:51 AM, Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I was wondering if there's a specific reason why repozo does not
> backup or create index files, whenever it does a full backup.
>
> I understand that creating index files for incremental backups is
> probably hard, but for a full backup it
I have only just started to use ZODB and have been able to use it with
ease so far.
I want to be able to have access to multiple ZODB databases at the same
time that are completely independent.
What I cannot see how to do is to keep the changes to the objects from
each database separate - that
15 matches
Mail list logo
